Industry Products

Bloomberg Customers

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

A cookie is a piece of data stored by your browser or device that helps websites like this one recognize return visitors. We use cookies to give you the best experience on BNA.com. Some cookies are also necessary for the technical operation of our website. If you continue browsing, you agree to this site’s use of cookies.

Your HR and Payroll compliance and policy solution! Comply with federal, state, and international laws, find answers to your most challenging questions, get timely updates with email alerts, and more with our suite of products.

A controversial income tax break came back from the dead in the Kansas Legislature
Feb. 22, but it appears to have little chance of ultimately surviving the current
legislative session.

The passthrough exemption, which applies to non-wage income from partnerships, LLCs,
sole proprietorships and S-corporations, was targeted in a bill (
H.B. 2178) that also would have raised income tax rates and created a third tax bracket for
higher income taxpayers.

The debate over the passthrough exemption in Kansas has taken on a new salience since
the election of President Donald Trump, who is working with Republicans in Congress
on a variety of tax cut proposals, including one that would tax income from passthrough
entities at 25 percent, well below the proposed 33 percent top income tax rate.

Brownback Veto

Gov. Sam Brownback (R)
vetoed the bill late Feb. 21, and an override attempt failed in the Senate the next
day after succeeding in the House that morning. But even senators who voted to sustain
the veto said Feb. 23 that eliminating the passthrough exemption will almost certainly
be part of any legislative package aimed at addressing the state’s budget problems
and restoring fairness to its tax code.

Senate Majority Leader Jim Denning (R) said the debate over H.B. 2178 in the Senate
showed that the state has a structural imbalance of $400 million a year and that eliminating
the passthrough exemption is needed to restore the balance.

“Our tax cuts in 2012 and the other changes that we’ve made since then have left us
about $400 million short,” he told Bloomberg BNA. “And the way forward will have to
include ending the passthrough exemption and increasing our income tax rates.”

Structural Fix

Senate President Susan Wagle (R) also voted to sustain the veto, but said in a statement
that her vote didn’t represent a defense of current tax and budget policy.

“I’m optimistic that legislators maintain their commitment to rejecting business as
usual,” Wagle said. “I’m confident that debating this proposal got us closer to a
compromise for a structural fix, and I am confident that we’ll soon come to a thoughtful,
bicameral agreement that does right by Kansas families.”

Wagle’s statement didn’t mention the passthrough exemption, but her spokesman told
Bloomberg BNA Feb. 23 that she expects that “closing the loophole will be part of
the final package.”

Retroactive Increase

Denning said he supported Brownback’s veto because he strongly opposed a provision
in the bill that imposed retroactive tax increases on ordinary income in addition
to passthrough income.

Those increases were unfair and politically unsustainable and “will have to be stripped
out,” Denning said.

“I did some calculations on the retroactivity provision in the bill, and it would
have increased the effective tax rate for this tax year to 6.3 percent, which compares
to the rates in our current brackets of 2.7 percent and 4.6 percent,”
he said. “And that is just too big a retroactive adjustment.”

Follow-On Bill

The problem was so obvious that there was already talk during the veto debate of a
follow-on bill that would have stripped the retroactivity provision from H.B. 2178.
But that maneuver would have recreated the budget problems that the bill was designed
to address, Denning said.

“Without retroactivity, you end up with a $100 million budget gap for fiscal year
2018 because the income tax increase doesn’t kick in until halfway through,”
he said. “But with it, you putting an unfair increase on ordinary earners.”

The solution, Denning said, was to sustain the veto, and then address that $100 million
gap from the spending side at the same time that a tax bill was being drawn up without
retroactivity for W-2 income.

The most likely candidate for spending cuts is K-12 education, which hasn’t yet felt
the budget knife during the current budget cycle, he said.

“The schools have known this was probably coming, and they’ve been preparing,”
he said. “And there are ways we can soften the blow. But K-12 cuts will have to be
part of it.”

Brownback also called on the Legislature to look to spending cuts in a statement he
released after the failed override effort. “I encourage [legislative leadership] to
find savings in the state’s budget before asking Kansans to find savings in theirs.”

Hopeful for Compromise

In the House, Rep. Steven Johnson (R), chairman of the Taxation Committee, expressed
disappointment that the veto override had failed, but said he was prepared to work
with Brownback and the Senate to find a compromise.

“I was glad to see that the House stood strong in overriding the veto and sending
a message that the time for tax reform is now,” he said. “But we’re willing to look
at any viable plan that addresses our budget’s structural problems.”

Johnson said he had been present during the Senate’s discussion of H.B. 2178 prior
to the override vote, and had taken note especially of the objections raised by Denning
and other senators to the retroactivity provision.

“They are right that it’s a terrible choice to have to make, and we can talk about
that,” he said. “But I fear that the alternative may be even worse.”

Trio of Bills Teed Up

Johnson also expressed doubt about the wisdom of squeezing K-12 funding as part of
a budget solution. “Among other things, we can’t be sure how the courts are going
to look at that,” he said, referring to ongoing litigation before the state Supreme
Court over the adequacy of school funding.

As for next steps in the House, Johnson said he had three bills teed up in his committee,
including one containing Brownback’s tax and budget proposals
(
H.B. 2315).

“We’ll take a look at that to see if there are any pieces that we can use, and look
at a couple of other bills to see where we’re going here,”
he said.

The result will probably be a bill that’s “a couple of steps to the right”
of H.B. 2178, he said. “It looks like that’s what we need to do to pick up enough
Senate votes to override a veto.”

To contact the reporter on this story: Christopher Brown in St. Louis at
ChrisBrown@bna.com

To contact the editor responsible for this story: Ryan C. Tuck at
rtuck@bna.com

All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to books@bna.com.

Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)

Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).

This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to research@bna.com.

Put me on standing order

Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)